-
Puppet developer Andrew writes about when to use Puppet or Cap. He'd know.
Blogroll
Popular posts
Useful links
Meta
Categories
- .NET (7)
- Build (51)
- Comics (4)
- Conferences (15)
- Continuous Integration (110)
- Deployment (13)
- DevOps (3)
- eXtreme Feedback Devices (16)
- Java (15)
- Jobs (8)
- News (156)
- links (125)
- Opinion (5)
- Patterns and Practices (23)
- Ruby (7)
- Site Admin (10)
- Systems Administration (11)
- Tools (5)
- Uncategorized (25)
- Version Control Systems (7)
- Video (7)
Job Board Menu
-
Home
Jobs
-
Test Job Post
at Test Job Post
Location: Test, United Kingdom -
Integration/Configuration Engineer
at Eloqua
Location: Vienna "Tyson's Corners", VA -
System Administrator / Devops
at Opera Software
Location: Melbourne, VIC, Australia -
Devops / Sysadmin
at onefinestay
Location: London, United Kingdom -
Devops Engineer / Build
at Gemvara
Location: Boston, MA
-
Test Job Post
at Test Job Post

4 Comments
I actually disagree that “He’d know”, he is the last person to know … if only because he is biased.
We’re all biased, Evgeny. But if I find a Capistrano author writing a similar post, I’ll update
Also there is this new trend of replacing “puppet” with a more flexible dsl, it’s called “chef”, the new “hot” thing in ruby server cooking. So new I didn’t yet have a chance to check it out
But capistrano is good at what it does, it copies files to a server and runs some commands — which is what a deployment system supposed to do. Puppet has a whole different purpose, it’s more of a “keep it so my servers have consistent behavior and configuration” kind of thing. It’s related to deployment, but not deployment itself.
Evgeny, I think that you, Andrew and myself all agree on this. Puppet for making sure that the server has all the dependencies that the app needs. Capistrano for deploying the application when you tell it to.
Having been through Cfengine 2 and the birth of Puppet, I’m taking a rest before I look at Chef.
Post a Comment